On January 3, 2019, the Congressional Black Caucus swore in its largest ever class of 55 members. The class includes five members who chair powerful congressional committees, setting policy in key areas such as financial services, homeland security, science and technology, education and government oversight.  

Our ranks also include three members who are part of the Democratic leadership team charged with setting the political and policy agenda for the entire House of Representatives. Without a doubt, this is the most powerful and influential Black caucus to ever exist since we formed nearly 50 years ago with a mission of serving as the conscience of the Congress.

From the need to help create more Black wealth to reversing the devastating impacts of mass incarceration, there are no shortage of issues that demand the attention and collective power of the Black caucus to confront. Each issue is of critical importance—but protecting and expanding voting rights stands above all others.

Voting rights must be the top agenda item. If we allow voter suppression to dilute Black America’s political power, we cannot build the coalitions necessary to advance the policies that will address all other problems confronting the Black community. The Black caucus is working together on a series of measures to ensure that every vote everywhere is counted, and every American who wants to vote can vote without intimidation.

The heart of our efforts are centered around taking immediate action to restore the pre-clearance provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA). In a 2013 decision, the Supreme Court gutted pre-clearance from the VRA, ruling in Shelby v. Holder that states and jurisdictions with histories of voter discrimination did not have to obtain pre-clearance from the federal government to make changes to elections laws or procedures governing how elections would be administered. 

The court made its ruling in spite of mounting evidence that the VRA was an effective deterrent to voter suppression and a key protector of the right of African Americans to fully participate in the electoral process. For example, from 1998 to 2013, nearly 90 state-proposed election changes were blocked, with hundreds more either never proposed or withdrawn entirely, because they could not pass muster under the pre-clearance provisions set forth in the VRA and Justice Department oversight.  

Justice Ruth Bader Gingsburg said it best in her dissenting opinion, writing that “throwing out pre-clearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.” 

Following the Shelby ruling, a torrent of unjust laws and practices were unleashed to suppress voting rights, with some measures from states like North Carolina described as targeting “African Americans with almost surgical precision.”  Texas implemented perhaps the strictest voter ID law, which allowed a gun permit to suffice as identification to vote but not a student ID.  This practice had previously been denied when pre-clearance provisions were in effect.  Georgia’s then secretary of state, who happened to be running for governor at the time, put more than 50,000 voter registrations on hold,  more than 70 percent of which belonged to African-American voters. Across the nation, local officials have closed hundreds of polling locations, shortened early voting and implemented other measures to restrict voting. Many of these measures were previously denied or never attempted because of the VRA’s pre-clearance provisions.  

Pre-clearance must be restored and a record must be created to show the Supreme Court the error of its way in thinking that America has reached the day when African Americans no longer need protections to vote without intimidation. 

The Black caucus is assuming this responsibility under the leadership of members like Congresswoman Marcia Fudge of Ohio, Congresswoman Terri Sewell of Alabama, Congressman John Lewis of Georgia and Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.

Congresswoman Fudge serves as Chairwoman of the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections.  As chair, Congresswoman Fudge is traveling the country and holding hearings to develop an official record of concern in support of restoring the pre-clearance provisions of the VRA. Her work will directly refute comments from Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote in 2013 for the court’s majority, that “nearly 50 years later, things have changed dramatically” since the VRA was passed in 1965. We know that is not the case.  

Congresswoman Sewell has introduced H.R. 4, the Voting Rights Advancement Act, which would stop the flood of egregious voter suppression tactics we have seen since 2013. Congresswoman Sewell’s legislation would restore the VRA by developing the process to determine which states must adhere to pre-clearance and ensure local governments are not engaging in discriminatory voter suppression. 

Additionally, members of the Black caucus have been active in the formulation of H.R. 1, the For the People Act of 2019, which among other items would create new national automatic voter registration requirements so more Americans are signed up to vote, enhance promotion of early voting and same day voter registration, make Election Day a national holiday and aid in recruiting and training more poll workers ahead of the 2020 elections to help reduce long lines at the polls. 

At 55 members strong, the Black caucus represents a considerable bloc of power to help build bipartisan consensus to restore the VRA’s pre-clearance provisions and reduce barriers to voting. Traditionally, these have been bipartisan issues, with the VRA being extended or amended five times since 1965 under both Republican and Democratic administrations. 

The Black caucus has made voting rights our north star because we cannot move forward effectively on any other issue until we first ensure African Americans can make their voices and priorities heard at the ballot box without fear and intimidation.

An accurate population count is critical to upholding individual rights and the efficient function of the United States government. It is an essential tool that determines the equitable distribution of services and ensures true democratic representation.

The founding fathers understood the count’s usefulness when they included language requiring a census in Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution. Unfortunately, the Constitution did not treat all races equally. A compromise—the three-fifths compromise—was struck to appease northern states that did not want enslaved Africans counted and southern states that wanted enslaved people counted to provide the South with a greater number of representatives in Congress. It was decided that every five enslaved Africans would be counted as three people.

The abolishment of slavery in 1865 made the three-fifths compromise obsolete, but race remains a thorny issue for the American census.

Over the years, the survey has gradually changed, modernizing the questions and terminology related to race. For example, in 2000, the census finally allowed individuals to identify as two or more races. This, and other changes, have helped provide a clearer picture of communities around the country and better data to draw on to address the specific needs of communities of color.

Census data is not only used to draw lines designating voting districts. The federal government and states use these numbers to evaluate and distribute appropriate funding to communities around the country. Any method of collection that does not accurately count—or undercounts communities—risks overlooking underserved regions that qualify for federal grant funding.

As our neighborhoods continue to diversify, leaders wishing to uphold the Constitution, including allies of communities of color, must examine the effectiveness of current data collection. All parties must join together to advocate for additional updates to promote fair access to the democratic process.

As the past chair of the congressional subcommittee that oversaw the 2010 census, I know the importance of protecting the integrity of the census and data collection process. Despite the positive changes we have made throughout history, there is a persistent trend of bad actors playing politics with the survey in order to disenfranchise racial minorities. We see a present-day example of this type of bad faith provision in the 2018 announcement that the Department of Commerce planned to add a citizenship question to the census. There was no valid reason for this proposal other than a concerted effort to suppress the response rate of minorities and new immigrants.

The effort to continue to disenfranchise racial and ethnic minorities is also evident in the irrational prison gerrymandering rule. This unfair rule currently allows prisoners to be counted as residents of the address where their correctional institutions are located even though most prisoners will return to the communities in which they lived prior to their arrests.

As a result of high rate of incarceration for minorities, the prison gerrymandering rule unequivocally discriminates against communities of color. According to the Department of Justice, roughly two million people are incarcerated in jails or prisons nationwide. People of color are disproportionately represented in that figure. Black people make up nearly 40 percent of prisoners while comprising only 13 percent of the population of the United States.

The impact of this unreasonable rule is significant. It takes away the right of individual prisoners to be accurately counted, and it directly disadvantages members of the communities from which they came—and to which they will likely return. As a result, votes in areas with high numbers of racial minorities are weakened and critical projects in these areas are underfunded.

The fact that prisoners are counted as residents of communities that have never been their homes is especially worrisome when one considers the drastic increase in the construction of these institutions in sparsely populated areas. In the past 40 years, 60 percent of new correctional facilities were constructed in non-metro regions. According to available data, residents in these typically rural areas are predominantly white whereas urban areas tend to be more racially diverse. Although rural communities may be in need of economic investments, the political resistance to making common sense changes to the prison gerrymandering rule suggests there may be ulterior motives at play.

One motive may be a concern that any change to population counts may negatively impact economic development projects centered around these correctional institutions. Residents of urban communities may also be concerned over the logistics of building prisons in urban areas. However, I am most concerned that officials are motivated by a desire to inflate the population count in rural areas for the purpose of suppressing the voting strength of racially diverse urban districts.

There is a simple solution to address this problem.

In Congress, I introduced the Correct the Census Count Act, requiring the Department of Commerce to reverse the prison gerrymandering rule. If this bill becomes law, incarcerated individuals would be counted as residents of where they lived before incarceration. This would significantly improve the accuracy of the data collected. And as a result, these communities would be better equipped to plan for and address the needs of their residents. Most importantly, this bill would lead to more accurate representation in the halls of Congress and beyond.

Passing the Correct the Census Count Act is essential to upholding the intent of the framers of the Constitution. The United States has reached a point in history when leaders must take decisive action to stand by our founding principles. When referring to the census, one such principle is paramount: all men and women are equal under the law. We must continue to make progress toward inclusivity if we wish to be a true representative democracy. Reversing the prison gerrymandering rule by passing the Correct the Census Count Act is one small step in the right direction.

Today, the mainstay of our American democracy – the sacred right to be heard at the ballot box – is under continued threat: a threat which the National Urban League has always recognized has an impact on the state of Black America.

As we saw in the last election cycle, voter suppression remains a shameful reality in America.  In Georgia, Florida, Kansas, Texas, North Dakota and countless communities across America, historically disenfranchised communities have been confronted by pernicious and blatantly partisan efforts to turn back the clock and erect barriers to the ballot box.  Enabled further by the disastrous Shelby County v. Holder decision, a vast, relentless voter suppression campaign has arisen: from the enactment of strict voter ID laws and restrictive absentee voting deadlines; to extreme gerrymandering that rigs the map against communities of color; to brazen purging of voters from voting rolls; to efforts to shrink the number of polling places, limit polling hours and discourage early voting, in addition to rejecting lawful ballots. 

In addition to voter suppression, the vote is being jeopardized by the continued threat of foreign attacks on our election systems.  In the 2016 presidential election, Russia launched a massive cyber-attack against the United States, breaching election systems in 21 states and stealing records containing voters’ private information.  Simultaneously, foreign agents spread disinformation to influence the American electorate through hundreds of thousands of social media posts, which were viewed by millions of people.  Yet, the Trump administration continues to refuse to hold Russia accountable and rejects Democratic initiatives to secure our elections from future attacks.

This cannot stand. The United States Congress has a constitutional – and a moral – responsibility to do everything in our power to protect the vote, ensuring that every citizen can exercise his or her right to vote and that every vote is counted as cast.  That is why, starting on Day One, our new Democratic House Majority took bold, urgently-needed action by advancing H.R. 1, the For The People Act: our landmark, transformative legislation to restore the promise of our democracy.  We will restore the people’s faith that government works for the public interest, not the special interests by reducing the role of big dark money in politics, advancing fair elections and cleaning up corruption in Washington.  This landmark legislation makes it easier not harder to vote:

• Improving Access to the Ballot Box – H.R. 1 incorporates Congressman John Lewis’s Voter Empowerment Act and expands access to the ballot box by taking aim at key institutional barriers to voting, such as burdensome registration systems and limited voting hours.  H.R. 1 creates automatic voter registration across the country, ensures that individuals who have completed felony sentences have their full rights restored , and expands voting by mail and early voting by modernizing the U.S. voting system.  Congressman John Lewis’s Voter Empowerment Act, a key pillar of H.R. 1, ensures equal access to the ballot for every eligible voter, modernizes our voter registration system in ways that help more Americans participate and takes steps to eliminate deceptive practices that deter voters from casting their ballots.
• Promote Integrity in our Elections – H.R. 1 fights back against Republicans’ assault on voting rights by committing Congress to build the constitutional record necessary to restore the Voting Rights Act, prohibiting voter roll purges, and ensuring that discriminatory voter ID laws do not prevent Americans citizens from exercising their rights.  We are proud to restore the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections, chaired by Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, which will hold hearings to advance the Voting Rights Act and protect access to the ballot.  H.R. 1 also ends partisan gerrymandering to prevent politicians from picking their voters and silencing the voices of traditionally disenfranchised communities.  
• Ensure Secure Election Systems – H.R. 1 ensures that American elections are decided by American voters without interference by foreign adversaries.  The bill enhances federal support for voting system security, particularly paper ballots, and increases oversight over election vendors.

To fully combat the assault on voting rights, the Democratic House is moving forward the Voting Rights Advancement Act, introduced by Congresswoman Terri Sewell.  This vital legislation restores the protections and enforcement of the Voting Rights Act after being seriously weakened by the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder Supreme Court decision. 

The VRAA restores a powerful tool that determines which states and localities with a recent history of voting rights violation must preclear election changes with the Department of Justice.  This legislation also requires a nationwide, practice-based preclearance for known discriminatory practices such as the creation of at-large districts, inadequate multilingual voting materials, and cuts to polling places; increases transparency by requiring a reasonable public notice for voting changes; and allows the Attorney General authority to request federal observers to be present anywhere in the country where a serious threat to voter access and fair elections exists.

Democrats will not rest until all Americans in every community can enjoy their full, unrestricted right to have their voices heard at the ballot box.  As we move forward, we ask for the continued leadership and partnership of America’s civil rights and community leaders, particularly the men and women of the National Urban League.  Together, let us march forward to reassert the rights of all Americans and reaffirm the full promise of the just and vibrant democracy we deserve. 

Much has been written, postulated, and quite frankly, misunderstood about the generation born between 1980 and 1996—also known as the millennials or Generation Y. This elusive demographic has been described as the logical offspring of the self-indulgence and entitlement of the 1980s and is often portrayed as aimless tech aficionados or hopeless idealists. The truth is, Generation Y is the most financially indebted generation in four generations and a growing majority believe our government should play a bigger role in solving the socio-economic issues currently plaguing our country[1] [2]. Millennials make up nearly a quarter of the total U.S. population and almost two-fifths of the working age population[3]. Tired media depictions aside, millennials are more than students and young adults, with the oldest millennials well into adulthood. They are parents, homeowners, community leaders—and voters. It would be in our nation’s best interest to focus on the electoral potential of this emerging bloc.

According to U.S. Census Bureau population projections, millennials are expected to surpass baby boomers as the largest adult generation by the end of 2019, positioning them as the largest American generation well into the 2060s. However, strength in numbers has not translated into electoral strength.

During the 2016 presidential elections,  only 49 percent of eligible millennials voted as compared to 69 percent of eligible baby boomers[4]. Even in the high-interest and highly contested 2018 midterms—the first major election where all millennials were of voting age—these statistics did not improve. Only 22 percent of eligible millennials turned out compared to 66 percent of eligible boomers[5].

Much like the baby boomers, whose wealth and influence have allowed them to dominate the media, government, and financial sectors of the United States for the past five decades, millennials are now poised to be a force to be reckoned with throughout the 21st century. We must do more than acknowledge this generation’s oversized potential in our political discourse; we must face some uncomfortable truths and address why large numbers of millennials don’t vote and how we can change that dynamic. My work with fellow members of this socially conscious, engaged, and talented generation of Americans has lead me to three (inconvenient) truths:

1.Despite their low numbers at the polls, millennials have been successful in shaping major domestic policy.

When the DREAM Act—a bill which would provide a pathway to citizenship to almost one million undocumented minors—failed to pass the Senate in 2010, DREAMers (undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children) did not wait for another member of Congress to champion their cause. They took matters into their own hands. These students and young people coordinated acts of nonviolent civil disobedience and targeted immigration reform advocacy across the country. Their grassroots level organizing resulted in the 2012 implementation of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), an executive order that provided undocumented persons who met its criteria temporary protection from deportation, work authorization, and the ability to apply for a social security number.

Enraged by the onslaught of fatal police shootings and abuse of young Black Americans by law enforcement, in 2014, millennial activists and allies harnessed the power of social media to organize on-the-ground protests across the country. That momentum transformed into an international movement for Black Lives. Through it came the enactment of several measures, including police body cameras, racial bias training, and the independent investigation of excessive force incidents in more than 24 states[6].

In 1999, 19 years before the horrifying events at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL, Columbine High School students held the unfortunate distinction of being involved in the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. Without the assistance of social media (Facebook was five years away), survivors mobilized parents, gun control activists, and students from across the state of Colorado in a grassroots effort to lobby state and Washington, D.C. lawmakers to end gun violence and promote gun control. Their protests of the National Rifle Association (NRA) convention held in Denver the same year made international news and landed them meetings with President Clinton and Vice President Gore. Their efforts also led to the formation of SAFE, which stands for Sane Alternatives to the Firearm Epidemic, a bipartisan organization that pushed for the successful passage of Amendment 22. The legislation closed the “gun show loophole,” strengthened background checks in the state of Colorado, and provided future generations with a blueprint for effective gun control activism.[7]  

Millennials have proven time and again that they are already well-versed in the political process—complete with enviable grassroots organizing and social activism techniques. They will not allow the powers-that-be to remain unaccountable for tone-deaf policies and legislation.  Millennials are a generation of disruptors. A vast majority believe that in its current form, voting is neither disruptive nor fast enough to right society’s historical injustices.

1. Many aspects of the voting process are archaic, troublesome, and thankless—at best.

For a generation that has come of age with a silver iPod in their ears and the internet literally at their fingertips, voting has failed to keep pace with current technology and modern-day expectations of convenience and expediency. For millennials, voting in America feels like tasking them to send a fax or use a typewriter and then asking them to wait in line for the privilege to do so. Millennials are often accused of over-exaggeration; but this is far from hyperbole—it’s reality. During the recent 2018 midterm elections, there were reports across the country of too few voting machines to service the number of registered voters; widespread equipment malfunctions, including paper jams and ballot misreads; and insufficient paper ballots when machines failed. Excluding overt voter suppression tactics, the failure to modernize our nation’s polling sites led to tens of thousands of voters waiting in line—sometimes up to five hours—and many abandoning the process altogether[8]. 

The assumption that millennials don’t vote because they are apathetic is unfair and mostly untrue. One could argue that the current voting system is apathetic to millennial engagement and should adjust to the legitimate needs and concerns of what will be the largest voting bloc for decades to come. In a country where most people can shop from their sofas, parallel park with no hands, and run a business from a cellphone, why are we still shuffling paperwork, hand counting ballots, and standing in lines to vote? If it were easier to vote, and the will of the people were truly carried out in every election, more millennials and more Americans—for that matter—would vote.

1. Millennials overwhelmingly see themselves as diverse, working class, and liberal while most policy makers and political candidates are not.

If we look at the 115th Congress, where millennials accounted for 30 percent of the voting population, only one percent were elected to Congress, compared to 63 percent of baby boomers[9]. The millennial generation is the most diverse adult population in American history with 44 percent minority representation. However,  the 116th Congress, the most diverse in U.S. history, still only has 22 percent minority representation[10]. In a 2017 survey of millennials, 32 percent identified as Republican/leaning Republican. During the same time, Republicans made up almost 54 percent of Congress and 66 percent of U.S. governors[11] [12] [13].

The lazy answer to low enthusiasm among millennials would be: “If more millennials voted, they could elect politicians who reflect their demographics and values.” While that is true, given the amount of time, money, and connections needed to run a campaign—resources many millennials don’t have—running for office is out of reach for many. The Center for Responsible Politics determined that the total cost of the 2016 presidential race was well over $2.3 billion, and the total cost for the 2018 Congressional races came in a little under $6 billion. In 2016, the average net worth of the top 20 presidential candidates was upwards of $13 million dollars. Donald Trump was worth an estimated $4.5 billion[14][15].

Meanwhile, a 2013 breakdown of American millionaires by generation showed that 42 percent of boomers are millionaires. This is more than twice the percentage of Generation Xers (18 percent) and millennials (19 percent)[16]. A 2017 report measuring the financial health of Americans revealed that the average millennial earns 20 percent less than baby boomers did at the same age[17]. To add obstruction to disparity, the longer an elected official is in office, the more likely he or she can amass the money and political clout necessary to run subsequent successful campaigns.

Far too often, it is those who can afford to run for office who make it on the ballot. To a growing number of millennials, choosing between the lesser of two—or three—evils no longer passes the smell test. This generation will not hold its noses and pull levers for candidates who are not passionate about their issues.

To rid our politics of this monied dynamic, our nation must engage in a wide-ranging conversation centered on campaign finance reform, the removal of big money from the election process, and strategies to open the doors to younger, diverse, and less affluent candidates. Imposing mandatory term limits would help ensure that politicians are not enriching their political power and effectively blocking new candidates and new ideas out of the political arena.

To tell millennials that things would change if they only voted is dismissive and psychologically painful. This generation faces tough challenges. Will millennials close the generational wealth gap, achieve the American dream of homeownership, curtail the cycle of high debt/low savings brought on by the mounting student loan crisis, and successfully navigate a particularly divisive and uncertain political climate? Generation Y is neither uninformed nor uninterested; it is unheard and largely unsupported.

Our nation must devote more time to understanding and empowering millennials through authentic conversations and engagement on platforms and in ways that resonate. Let’s move beyond rhetoric and start investing resources into modernizing and reforming the broken parts of our shared elections system. Despite—or perhaps because of—the obstacles millennials face, the motivation to create change is as high as optimism for the future[18] and the role millennials will play in it. Given the right tools and opportunity, millennials are more than capable of creating true change both inside and outside the voting booth—and more importantly—forging a more convenient path towards equity and inclusion for the next generation of transformative leaders, activists—and voters.

[1] Houle, Jason N. “A Generation Indebted: Young Adult Debt Across Three Cohorts.” Social Problems Vol. 61, No. 3 (August 2014), Pp. 448-465, vol. 61, no. 3, Aug. 2014, pp. 448–465.

[2] Parker, Kim, et al. “Generation Z Looks a Lot Like Millennials on Key Social and Political Issues.” Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project, Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project, 18 Jan. 2019, www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/01/17/generation-z-looks-a-lot-like-millenn....

[3] Frey, William H. “The Millennial Generation: A Demographic Bridge to America's Diverse Future.” Brookings, Brookings, 7 May 2018, www.brookings.edu/research/millennials/.

[4] Lowe, Josh. “Who Voted in 2016? Millennials Will Outnumber Boomers at the Ballot Box.” Newsweek, 1 Aug. 2017, www.newsweek.com/millennials-baby-boomers-voters-who-voted-2016-644746.

[5] Yglesias, Matthew. “The 2018 Electorate Was Older, Whiter, and Better Educated than in 2016.” Vox, 12 Nov. 2018, www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/12/18083014/2018-election-result....

[6] Staff. “Black Lives Matter Gets Laws Passed In 24 States.” PopularResistance.Org, PopularResistance.Org, 5 Aug. 2015, popularresistance.org/in-one-year-blacklivesmatter-gets-laws-passed-in-24-states/.

[7] Schulman, Jeremy, et al. “19 Years before Parkland, Columbine Students Tried to Fix America's Gun Problem.” Mother Jones, 24 Mar. 2018, www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/03/19-years-before-parkland-columbine-....

[8] Goggin, Benjamin. “Long Lines, Broken Machines, and Gun Scares - Here Are the Reported Problems Voters Are Experiencing during the Midterms.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 6 Nov. 2018, www.businessinsider.com/voting-problems-by-state-2018-midterm-elections-....

[9] Fox, Justin. “The Long Reign of Baby Boomers Isn't Ending Just Yet.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, 29 Apr. 2018, www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-29/long-reign-of-the-baby-boo....

[10] Geiger, Abigail, et al. “The Changing Face of Congress in 6 Charts.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 15 Feb. 2019, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/15/the-changing-face-of-congress/.

[11] “116th United States Congress.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 31 Mar. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/116th_United_States_Congress.

[12] “U.S. Governors - Number by Political Party Affiliation 1990-2018 | Statistic.” Statista, www.statista.com/statistics/198486/number-of-governors-in-the-us-by-poli....

[13] “Trends in Party Affiliation among Demographic Groups.” Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 18 Sept. 2018, www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-affiliation-among-demo....

[14] “Cost of Election.” OpenSecrets.org, 2018, www.opensecrets.org/overview/cost.php.

[15] Fontevecchia, Agustino. “Forbes' 2016 Presidential Candidate Wealth List.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 3 Mar. 2016, www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2015/09/29/forbes-2016-presidential-c....

[16] “Breakdown of U.S. Millionaires by Generation 2013 | Statistic.” Statista, 2014, www.statista.com/statistics/300527/us-millionaires-generation-age/.

[17] “A Financial Scorecard: Millennials vs. Baby Boomers.” A Financial Scorecard: Millennials vs. Baby Boomers | Dowling & Yahnke, 2019, www.dywealth.com/resources/blog/financial-scorecard-millennials-vs-baby-....

[18] Murphy, Meg. “NowUKnow: The Unbridled Optimism of Millennials.” PreparedU View | Bentley University, 13 Feb. 2019, www.bentley.edu/impact/articles/nowuknow-unbridled-optimism-millennials.

The peculiar institution, coined by South Carolinian John C. Calhoun, seventh vice president of the United States (1825-1832), was a euphemism used by white southerners to describe slavery in the South, a time in our history when Blacks were counted as “fractional” persons in the U.S. census.

The decennial census, a necessary, constitutionally mandated exercise repeated each decade since 1790, shares a peculiarity of its own, not completely unassociated with Calhoun’s coinage of the term during slavery. At that time, the census deliberately counted Blacks as less than a “whole”—three-fifths of a person, specifically. Now, it involuntarily undercounts the Black population—disproportionately and differentially. Current plans for the 2020 census, however, have caused Black organizations and communities of color to question the involuntary nature of the decennial undercount of historically undercounted communities this time around. The reasons are many.  

For starters, the Census Bureau’s prison-based gerrymandering residence criteria, reaffirmed in 2017, counts incarcerated individuals where they are held in federal or state custody, often in far-flung rural locations, rather than at their former home jurisdictions.  Racial disparities in prison sentencing disproportionately affect African Americans and directly jeopardize an accurate census count of Black and Brown populations.

According to studies, African Americans are 12 percent of the U.S. population yet incarcerated at 33 percent of the country’s prison population. Prison-based gerrymandering violates the Black community’s constitutional right to “one person, one vote” by inflating the power of predominantly white rural districts, where many prisons are located, to the detriment of urban districts, where many incarcerated persons and their families maintain a permanent residence. It further denies our communities full representation in the halls of Congress, the Electoral College and on many other state and local legislative bodies.

Similarly, prison-based gerrymandering skews a community’s fair share and allocation of approximately $800 billion in federal funding, by shifting funding away from the home jurisdictions of incarcerated persons and their families, and sending it directly to the “upstate” or rural locations of their confinement; thereby taking food out of the mouths of Black and Brown children.

In addition, according to the census, while the net undercount rate for white children ages 0-4 years old was 2.7 percent in the 2010 census, it was an alarming 6.5 percent for Black children and 7.5 percent for young Latino children. According to Census Bureau researchers, the undercount of Black and Brown children has increased each decade. It is not expected to abate in the 2020 census without massive education, outreach and messaging to Hard to Count communities, reminding them to count everyone in the household, including: foster children, step children, grandchildren, infants, “play cousins” and everybody else.

Funding for Healthy Babies, WIC, Headstart and other programs are not funded to their full potential in our communities due to the undercount of young Black and Brown children. The inaccurate count of Black children has the same political consequence as prison gerrymandering: reduced political representation, diminished federal funding and a threat to civil rights protections under the law.

Finally, the Trump administration’s brazen effort to impose an untested, unjust “citizenship” question to the 2020 census has struck fear across documented and undocumented immigrant communities of color.

Currently under Supreme Court review, if the citizenship question goes forward and the census experiences a sizeable undercount, states with large immigrant populations will lose political representation in Congress. An undercount would also shift power away from urban communities toward rural, politically conservative areas, providing disproportionate political power to these communities.

Coupled with well organized—and well-funded—voter disenfranchisement campaigns aimed at people of color in several states, the citizenship question exposes the Trump administration’s effort to hide or suppress America’s multi-ethnic, “browning,” rather than reveal it.  Worse, many view the citizenship question as a concerted effort to diminish the influence of minority voters—what a New York Times Magazine article recently called, “the 50-year campaign to roll back the Voting Rights Act.”

Because the census is used to determine a community’s political representation and allocation of federal resources, a low count in African-American communities could turn back the number of members in the Congressional Black Caucus as well as Black elected officials in statewide offices across the country.  The ramifications for Black and other communities of color are incredibly high in terms of what’s at stake for economic and political power.  If we are not counted, we have to live with the results of fewer resources, less representation and fewer civil rights protections (the latter of which are monitored and enforced based on census data) for at least the next 10 years.

The census is scheduled to begin on April 1, 2020, in the midst of what we can expect to be a messy presidential election season.  But we cannot afford to be distracted—not for one minute.  We must all stand up and be counted in the 2020 census.  Our very existence as Black people in this country depends on it.  

Tell your friends, neighbors and family members that the census is safe and their data is protected by some of the strictest laws in the nation.  It cannot be shared with local, state or federal entities, not even the White House. Tell them that their count ensures that their fair share of billions of dollars in federal funding reaches their communities for programs like housing, health, transportation and education. 

Finally, tell them that the Black Count Matters—still.  This country’s constitutional framers understood the power of the Black count in 1790 when we were enslaved.  Clearly our count (and our vote) is just as powerful today.  Stand up and Be Counted!

The average American may be hard pressed to point Randolph County out on a map. This little county on rural, former plantation lands in southwestern Georgia was certainly not at the forefront of the struggle for voting rights in the United States. Yet, shortly before the 2018 midterm elections, all of that changed when the county’s election officials and their hired consultants announced a plan to close seven of the county’s nine polling places, all—coincidentally—in precincts where the majority of voters are African American. Following a disastrous run in the press, the Randolph County Board of Elections had the good sense not to shut down roughly 80 percent of its polling places. But it was too late, and the damage was done. Randolph County had inadvertently shined a national spotlight on nefarious voter suppression tactics in Georgia, including a novel strategy that pit ostensibly natural allies in the fight for civil rights—people of color and people with disabilities—against each other.

Unwittingly—or otherwise—election officials leveraged people with disabilities against Black voters when it cited failure to comply with the accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as the reason for the mass closure of polling locations. And to an extent, there is truth to be found in this explanation.

America’s polling places have an accessibility problem. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that only 40 percent of polling places were fully accessible in 2016. As dismal as it may seem that less than half of polling places in the U.S. are ADA compliant, that percentage is actually at an all-time high. Across our nation, voters with disabilities are showing up on Election Day despite being confronted with polling places with too few accessible parking spaces, no paved parking lot or path of travel, doors that are too heavy to open, dangerously steep ramps, and even makeshift “ramps” of folding tables propped on wooden blocks. And it doesn’t get much better on the inside. Voting stations are often not set up for wheelchair access, don’t protect the privacy of the voter’s ballot, and don’t have headphones ready for audio balloting. All too often, the accessible voting system is not even set up and turned on for use.

Make no mistake: inaccessible polling places are an active voter suppression threat to eligible voters with disabilities. This is a long-standing, nationwide form of discrimination, and our election officials must act immediately to bring their polling locations into compliance with the ADA. Disability advocates are undeterred and will continue to survey polling sites, work with elections officials, and proactively solve accessibility issues with low-cost solutions and same-day modifications that ensure ADA compliance and prevent polling place closure. Ultimately, shutting down large numbers of polling places benefits no voters and fails to improve accessibility.

We know from GAO data that the majority of polling places have failed to comply with the ADA since its inception. Given that this is a persistent and widespread problem, we must ask: why would any one county suddenly become so concerned with ADA compliance? Why did this concern suddenly present itself right before a major election? Why in a majority African-American county? Why in a county formerly covered under the federal pre-clearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 based on a well-documented history of suppressing the African-American vote? I would posit that if it looks like voter suppression and it sounds like voter suppression, then it likely is voter suppression—this time under the pretext of caring about the previously ignored needs of disabled voters and using ADA noncompliance as a convenient scapegoat.

Perhaps even more sinister are the noted attempts to criminalize providing assistance to eligible voters. Under the Voting Rights Act—and Mississippi law—people with disabilities are guaranteed the right to an assistor of their choice when casting a ballot. This provision, however, did not protect Quitman County’s Debra Dennard, who was charged with two felony charges for assisting her father, a partially blind amputee, with filling out his absentee ballot. Quitman County’s overzealous election officials also ensnared Lula Smart, a voting rights activist, in their fevered attempt to root out statistically baseless voter fraud. Ms. Smart was charged with a whopping 32 felonies, totaling more than 100 years in prison, for carrying sealed absentee ballots to a mailbox. The targeted prosecution of Black community leaders, including for exercising their federal right to assist voters with disabilities cast a ballot will create fear and apprehension among African-American voters and voters with disabilities alike—establishing a new, bold, and divisive frontier in voter suppression tactics.

In light of all this, advocates with disabilities have learned that we can never back down from demanding full compliance with the ADA, protecting voters’ right to assistance, and fighting to end all forms of voter suppression. In these turbulent political times, we urge African-American and disabled voters to stand in solidarity when any voter’s rights are threatened. We must stay vigilant against voter suppression tactics as we prepare for the 2020 presidential election. We, the people—the people of color, the people with disabilities, the people who scare the status quo—are neither fooled nor frightened by these tactics—and we are not going anywhere. 

I joined Facebook because I believe deeply in the good that happens when people connect. We can stay in touch with friends, create communities, and talk about important issues. Facebook gives people a way to use their voice — and this is especially important for people who want to build social movements or whose voices have not always been heard.

Unfortunately, these same connections can also be abused by people with bad intentions. That’s what happened in the 2016 U.S. presidential election when foreign actors used networks of fake accounts to spread misinformation and sow division. According to two independent reports commissioned by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Russian Internet Research Agency’s efforts disproportionately targeted communities of color.

Our country has a long history of people trying to suppress civil rights and voting rights. That should not happen on Facebook. Our teams are working hard to prevent this type of abuse, and we’re asking for ongoing feedback from the civil rights community to make sure we’re taking the right steps.

One of the ways we’re doing this is through an audit of our efforts to strengthen civil rights on our platform. In May of last year, we asked Laura Murphy, a highly respected civil rights and civil liberties leader, to guide the audit. I committed to overseeing its progress. After speaking with more than 90 civil rights organizations, including the National Urban League, Laura provided an update in December that focused on our election-related efforts – including three steps we took to prevent voter suppression and encourage voter engagement:

• First, we focused on voter suppression as a distinct civil rights challenge. We updated our policy prohibiting voter suppression to expressly ban misrepresentations about how to vote – such as claims that you can vote using an online app and statements about whether a vote will be counted. Other misinformation related to voting that is identified by our systems – including false claims of polling places being closed or long wait times – is now sent proactively to third-party fact-checkers for review. The revised policy also prohibits threats of violence related to voting or voter registration.
• Second, we made it easier to report false voting information on Facebook. During the 2018 U.S. midterm election cycle, we added an option for people to report potential voter suppression content from their profiles and created specific reporting channels for state election authorities and for voting rights and election protection groups. These channels enabled us to review and act on this content faster and more effectively using both artificial intelligence and human review. 
• Third, we expanded our efforts to encourage voter registration and engagement. Ahead of elections – and when people turn 18 – we remind them to register to vote. We also help them find their polling places and remind them to vote on Election Day.

These changes are making a difference. During the U.S. midterms, we removed approximately 45,000 pieces of content related to voter suppression, 90 percent of which we discovered proactively using artificial intelligence before they were reported by users. And Facebook and Instagram helped register an estimated 2 million people in 2018, according to our nonpartisan partner TurboVote.

This is all part of our broader work to protect elections. We now have more than 30,000 people working on safety and security worldwide, with 40 teams focused on elections. Last year, we removed thousands of Pages, Groups, and accounts involved in inauthentic behavior so they can’t mislead others about their identity and intentions – including in the midterm elections. And every day, we use artificial intelligence to block millions of attempts to create fake accounts.

We have also shared more information about political ads on Facebook to protect elections. Political advertising serves an important purpose; it helps candidates share their views with the public, and it can encourage people to get involved in the political process. But political ads can also stoke division and fear as well as manipulate and deceive — all of which we saw during and after the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Helping people understand who’s trying to influence their vote will help us better defend against interference. That’s why we now require political advertisers in the U.S., the UK, the European Union, Israel, Ukraine, Brazil, and India to confirm who they are and where they’re located before they can run ads. You can then see details like who paid for the ads, how much they spent in what currency, and the demographics of who saw the ads in a searchable ad library that anyone can access. We made these updates ahead of elections in these countries and plan to roll out a global version by late June.

These are incredibly complex challenges, and the threats will persist. This is the reality for every company in the digital age. No one institution can solve this on its own. That’s why we’re working more closely than ever with other companies around the world, civil and human rights groups, law enforcement, governments, and NGOS to better identify and stop potential interference.

We have a lot of work to do. We must constantly improve to stay one step ahead while knowing that bad actors will never stop trying. We will continue to invest resources and time in these efforts because it’s critical to us that Facebook is a safe and productive place for our community. We were more prepared for these kinds of attacks in the 2018 U.S. midterms than we were in 2016, and we will improve even more between now and the 2020 U.S. election.

We are committed to continuing to share the progress we are making on these issues. This summer, Laura Murphy will give her next update on our efforts to advance civil rights across elections and other areas on our platform. This work is vitally important to our company, to our country, and to the people who rely on us to provide a safe place to discuss issues that matter to them. By continuing to partner with civil rights organizations and others, I believe more than ever that Facebook can empower the voiceless, strengthen our democracies, and ultimately help create a more connected and civically engaged world.